In a democracy, politicians from various parties debate to make their vision the one that guides the country. The hope is that when the debate concludes we end up going in a direction that has at least been considered from many different angles.

Although one party’s vision may win out over others, it may be tempered or enhanced by arguments from the opposing parties. When all sides agree unanimously on something, it’s a sign that the issue is serious enough to rise above the daily politicking.

Canada’s Federal Sustainable Development Act, which became law in late June, is a bold step toward ensuring that governments live up to their environmental commitments. And it’s one that all political parties got together to support. It could revolutionize the way the government deals with national environmental issues.

The David Suzuki Foundation has long advocated for such a law, grounded in basic environmental science. The foundation helped draft the original bill, which was based on our report “Sustainability Within a Generation”, written by environmental lawyer and professor David Boyd. The bill was introduced in Parliament by retiring Liberal MP John Godfrey. (Read our 2006 report on which the new law is based, “Toward a National Sustainable Development Strategy for Canada”.)

The law’s wording puts the environment at the forefront: “The Government of Canada accepts the basic principle that sustainable development is based on an ecologically efficient use of natural, social and economic resources and acknowledges the need to integrate environmental, economic and social factors in the making of all decisions by government.”

I’m happy to finally see the government listing the environment right up there with the economy! I felt the same in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio with Agenda 21, a massive plan to get the world onto a sustainable path. Unfortunately, a recession knocked out all that goodwill. Let’s hope this time for courageous political leadership in implementing and enforcing the law.

Under the Act, the government must establish a Federal Sustainable Development Strategy with “measurable” targets for protecting Canada’s environment in accordance with the precautionary principle. (The principle states that “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”)

The government must also set out its strategy for meeting the targets, identify the minister responsible for meeting each target, and allow the Environment Commissioner to review the strategy and targets in advance.

The Act, which applies to the policies and programs of all departments as well as a number of federal agencies, requires the government to produce a revised strategy every three years. And it establishes an advisory council that includes the provinces, business, First Nations, environmental groups, and labour.

That’s the kind of cooperation we need if we are to solve our many environmental problems. Of course, it doesn’t let the government completely off the hook. We still need more action on global warming, including a stronger commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And we need to ensure that the government takes the law seriously and doesn’t just pay it lip service, as it has with our signing of the Kyoto Protocol.

At least it provides for more accountability and transparency–and includes incentives. For example, some bonuses for senior department bureaucrats will be contingent on how well they meet environmental goals.And the Environment Commissioner will audit and report to Parliament annually on the government’s performance in meeting the environmental targets and the terms of its environmental strategy.

It may be some time before we see how effective the law is, but all parties have at least recognized the need to work together on such crucial issues. It’s something the United Kingdom and Sweden have been doing for years with their own sustainable development strategies. It may take a while to catch up to them, but at least we have a plan to get there.

Parliament often seems like a place for acrimonious argument and name-calling rather than a venue for rational discussion, but in getting together to draft, discuss, and support the passage of this important law, politicians from across the Canadian political spectrum have shown that there is a better way to find solutions.

Take David Suzuki’s Nature Challenge and learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org/.